Voiceofreason01:or maybe they were confused and angry kids and not the blood thirsty killers

I'm not a bloodthirsty killer, although I'm often confused and/or angry.

Here's my lifetime stats:

Cops Shot: 0Kids Exploded: 0Adults Exploded: 4 (but it was a propane accident, one of the adults was me, and only eyebrows were damaged)

I'm not a killer. Those "kids" on the other hand put a shrapnel bomb next to a child in a crowd at a public event then shot at cops and killed each-other. They're very much bloodthirsty killers, to the tee.

doglover:I'm not a killer. Those "kids" on the other hand put a shrapnel bomb next to a child in a crowd at a public event then shot at cops and killed each-other. They're very much bloodthirsty killers, to the tee.

So maybe we should hold the one still alive without trial so that he can be beaten by the police and sexually assaulted in jail. Which is what a lot of people(even some who should know better) have been suggesting. Sounds like justice to me. Something terrible happened and this kid should face the consequences but we also need to respect his rights and give him a fair trial. Seeking revenge in this situation is NOT OK.

Voiceofreason01:or maybe they were confused and angry kids and not the blood thirsty killers that most of you are portraying them as.

/I find this bloodlust from the media, the public and (more worryingly) the government.....distastful

Blood thirsty? Maybe not. But they are killers. They killed people. So I think the term applies here. Blood thirsty may even be appropriate here as well, as there is evidence that they were planning out several more attacks. Sounds a bit 'blood thirsty' to me.

Cythraul:Voiceofreason01: or maybe they were confused and angry kids and not the blood thirsty killers that most of you are portraying them as.

/I find this bloodlust from the media, the public and (more worryingly) the government.....distastful

Blood thirsty? Maybe not. But they are killers. They killed people. So I think the term applies here. Blood thirsty may even be appropriate here as well, as there is evidence that they were planning out several more attacks. Sounds a bit 'blood thirsty' to me.

The point I was getting at is that even if they were evil bloodthirsty killers they would still deserve a just and fair trial as well as a basic level of respect as human beings while the one kid is being held. I find the level of hate and bloodlust from many of you in these threads to be wholly inappropriate and more than a little offensive. Be better than that.

Voiceofreason01:Cythraul: Voiceofreason01: or maybe they were confused and angry kids and not the blood thirsty killers that most of you are portraying them as.

/I find this bloodlust from the media, the public and (more worryingly) the government.....distastful

Blood thirsty? Maybe not. But they are killers. They killed people. So I think the term applies here. Blood thirsty may even be appropriate here as well, as there is evidence that they were planning out several more attacks. Sounds a bit 'blood thirsty' to me.

The point I was getting at is that even if they were evil bloodthirsty killers they would still deserve a just and fair trial as well as a basic level of respect as human beings while the one kid is being held. I find the level of hate and bloodlust from many of you in these threads to be wholly inappropriate and more than a little offensive. Be better than that.

I was just being technical in my response in the use of your terminology. I think they deserve a fair trail as well. And the scene of the cheering village people lining up as law enforcement vehicles went down the street at parade speed after the suspect's capture was a bit unsettling.

But in the age of American Fear, I doubt he'll get much in the way of a fair trail. Especially if they label him an 'enemy combatant.'

Meh, fark that piece of shiat. If he lives, he'll get a fair trial, an expensive trial, and he'll get a needle in his arm, which is better than he deserves. And it being federal, he'll get that needle a lot sooner than for a state death penalty.

A while back, I said I had sympathy for teenage criminals. Like somehow, somewhere they were failed in life. They made one mistake, and it will ruin the rest of their lives.

I'm a typical bleeding heart liberal. I get sad when sympathetic criminals on Law and Order get put away, and those are just fictional characters.

That being said, I have no sympathy for these guys. They put a bomb in a crowded area and people died. They weren't playing with a gun and it went off, they weren't selling drugs to feed their family, they did this for no reason other than to harm innocent people. They get no sympathy from me.

However:

Give him a fair trial. Show the rest of the world that no matter how evil you are, you are not greater than the system.

Instead, put a camera on him in his prison 24/7. Otherwise, treat him the same as any other inmate - except anybody in the world with an internet connection can get a look at him whenever they want. Let any hate-gibberer with a Qu'ran down his shorts have a look, to see that their ten-foot-tall bulletproof jihadi superhero is just another yutz in a jumpsuit waiting for his serving of prison cafeteria chow.

basemetal:Meh, fark that piece of shiat. If he lives, he'll get a fair trial, an expensive trial, and he'll get a needle in his arm, which is better than he deserves. And it being federal, he'll get that needle a lot sooner than for a state death penalty.

What do you base that on? The last part, that is. McVeigh went fast, but he was a "volunteer". There haven't been a whole hell of a lot of federal death penalty cases in recent years to go by.

I think the fact that they committed a terrorist bombing on a street packed solid with security cameras of all kinds and apparently had no exit strategy whatsoever sums up their cunning criminal minds. If being rock stupid was a defense the jails would be very empty.

This is the city where John Adams defended the British soldiers accused in the Boston Massacre. Give this moron a fair trial with a vigorous defense. If convicted THEN hang him by his feet in the Common and auction off baseball bats to benefit the victims and put it all on Pay-Per-View.

Gulper Eel:I'm pro-death-penalty, but executing him is just...unimaginative.

Instead, put a camera on him in his prison 24/7. Otherwise, treat him the same as any other inmate - except anybody in the world with an internet connection can get a look at him whenever they want. Let any hate-gibberer with a Qu'ran down his shorts have a look, to see that their ten-foot-tall bulletproof jihadi superhero is just another yutz in a jumpsuit waiting for his serving of prison cafeteria chow.

Meh, don't give him an audience. I'd rather him be given life in prison with no contact or communication to the outside world. Let everything about him fade away to nothing more than a footnote in history. They wanted attention, the best thing would be to deny him that.

scottydoesntknow:Meh, don't give him an audience. I'd rather him be given life in prison with no contact or communication to the outside world. Let everything about him fade away to nothing more than a footnote in history. They wanted attention, the best thing would be to deny him that.

/After a fair trial of course

I'm against the death penalty, even for this waste of flesh, but I have my doubts he'll have much luck escaping the needle. If he does, he likely WILL be in proteective custody, 23hrs/day in a cell alone. At this point, I'm not even sure if the prosecution will accept a plea bargain for life. They have pretty much all they need already for an easy conviction, unless they royally fark something up.

nekom:scottydoesntknow:Meh, don't give him an audience. I'd rather him be given life in prison with no contact or communication to the outside world. Let everything about him fade away to nothing more than a footnote in history. They wanted attention, the best thing would be to deny him that.

/After a fair trial of course

I'm against the death penalty, even for this waste of flesh, but I have my doubts he'll have much luck escaping the needle. If he does, he likely WILL be in proteective custody, 23hrs/day in a cell alone. At this point, I'm not even sure if the prosecution will accept a plea bargain for life. They have pretty much all they need already for an easy conviction, unless they royally fark something up.

I'm thinking they'll go for the death penalty as a reason to scare him into talking then drop it down to life. Unless he's actually smart (which hasn't been the case during most of this) and says fark it I'll take the death penalty, as it would probably be a better outcome than life in prison.

scottydoesntknow:I'm thinking they'll go for the death penalty as a reason to scare him into talking then drop it down to life. Unless he's actually smart (which hasn't been the case during most of this) and says fark it I'll take the death penalty, as it would probably be a better outcome than life in prison.

Maybe they will use it to get him to talk. It would be nice to know for sure if there was anyone else involved in this. If the FBI is able to determine that without him, though, a plea bargain may not be in the cards at all. Possible mitigating factors: His age, the influence of his brother. Possible aggravating factors: Pretty much everything else about the case. His defense attorney will certainly have their work cut out for them.

As for death vs. life in prison, which one is worse? Well, that's debatable. Even in supermax you can have something of a life. Books, writing, etc. It's a lot more than 4 of their victims have now. On the other hand, unless he's an absolute sociopath (which I'm not dismissing, that's possible), he's got to be wrestling with a lot of bad things in his head, and likely always will. As for which is "better", well that's just a matter of opinion I suppose.

simplicimus:It would be fitting if he were tried in Boston, but selecting an impartial Jury would be pretty near impossible. So I guess it will be a federal prosecution.

McVeigh's trial was moved to Colorado after the court granted a change of venue. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same requested, and granted in this case for that very reason. I'm not sure it makes much sense though, while the victims were all in Boston at the time, the audience was the entire nation. I'm not sure it's safe to assume that he'd get any more of a fair trial in any other part of the country, honestly.

nekom:McVeigh's trial was moved to Colorado after the court granted a change of venue. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same requested, and granted in this case for that very reason. I'm not sure it makes much sense though, while the victims were all in Boston at the time, the audience was the entire nation. I'm not sure it's safe to assume that he'd get any more of a fair trial in any other part of the country, honestly.

He was also executed in Indiana, one of the few things to come out of this god forsaken state

nekom:simplicimus: It would be fitting if he were tried in Boston, but selecting an impartial Jury would be pretty near impossible. So I guess it will be a federal prosecution.

McVeigh's trial was moved to Colorado after the court granted a change of venue. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same requested, and granted in this case for that very reason. I'm not sure it makes much sense though, while the victims were all in Boston at the time, the audience was the entire nation. I'm not sure it's safe to assume that he'd get any more of a fair trial in any other part of the country, honestly.

Send him down south. A while after 9/11 there were a bunch of 'the day Southerners pretended to care about the North' comments. So apparently, we don't really give a flip about Boston, or some other such nonsense.

Voiceofreason01:or maybe they were confused and angry kids and not the blood thirsty killers that most of you are portraying them as.

When you look at an 8 year old child, smile, and then put down a bomb next to him, you stop being a 'confused and angry kid'.

When the bomb blew up, and that child lay dead, his sister hurt beside him, his mother on the ground unresponsive and people with lost limbs all over, he just stared and looked at the damage before running away. When you do that, you stop being a 'confused and angry kid'.

When he came back home, he mocked the victims of the bombing on twitter, the next day he showed up to class very chipper, he went to the gym and to a party. When you do that after the crimes you did, you stop being a 'confused and angry kid'.

After having a few days of fun, they walked to a cop and killed him in cold blood. After carjacking someone, holding him hostage and taking his cash. Then they engaged in a firefight with coppers and he drove over his brother trying to get away. When you do that after the all the crimes you've done so far, you stop being 'a confused and angry kid'

nekom:simplicimus: It would be fitting if he were tried in Boston, but selecting an impartial Jury would be pretty near impossible. So I guess it will be a federal prosecution.

McVeigh's trial was moved to Colorado after the court granted a change of venue. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same requested, and granted in this case for that very reason. I'm not sure it makes much sense though, while the victims were all in Boston at the time, the audience was the entire nation. I'm not sure it's safe to assume that he'd get any more of a fair trial in any other part of the country, honestly.

You're correct. After the 24/7 coverage, I have no idea where one could find an impartial jury.

Everything that they did was rational. Evil? Yes. Rational? Absolutely.

They wanted to create a confrontation with the cops and go out in a blaze of glory in order to kill more people. I don't understand what's not rational with this frame of mind if you're an Islamic terrorist.

simplicimus:You're correct. After the 24/7 coverage, I have no idea where one could find an impartial jury.

Actually, if they want to pick me, they can just give me a call (I'm having a good time I don't want to stop at all)

I'm serious. I know what the media has shown to us, but if I were to be a jury, I would simply stop reading about all this, and I would concentrate only on the evidence that would be shown to me at the trial, not preconceived notions I have the liberty of forming as just another person following this.

Everything that they did was rational. Evil? Yes. Rational? Absolutely.

They wanted to create a confrontation with the cops and go out in a blaze of glory in order to kill more people. I don't understand what's not rational with this frame of mind if you're an Islamic terrorist.

I'm just thankful they took their bombing lessons from the Taliban as opposed to the IRA otherwise it could have been a lot worse.

Voiceofreason01:doglover:I'm not a killer. Those "kids" on the other hand put a shrapnel bomb next to a child in a crowd at a public event then shot at cops and killed each-other. They're very much bloodthirsty killers, to the tee.

So maybe we should hold the one still alive without trial so that he can be beaten by the police and sexually assaulted in jail. Which is what a lot of people(even some who should know better) have been suggesting. Sounds like justice to me. Something terrible happened and this kid should face the consequences but we also need to respect his rights and give him a fair trial. Seeking revenge in this situation is NOT OK.

Nobody said that. I agree with doglover(hey, there's a first for everything). They are blood thirsty killers. Now let's prosecute them to the full extent of the law.

SirGunslinger:I'm just thankful they took their bombing lessons from the Taliban as opposed to the IRA otherwise it could have been a lot worse.

Oh yeah, we are lucky for that. Take the Time Square failed bomber. If only he had planned everything correctly, with the amount of explosives he had, we were looking at literally hundreds of dead and thousands injured.

Rembrant_Q_Einstein:I wonder why they killed the campus cop. Seems kinda random and it ruined any chance they had for a getaway.

They didn't want a getaway, they wanted to kill as many as they could before they died.

MBK:A while back, I said I had sympathy for teenage criminals. Like somehow, somewhere they were failed in life. They made one mistake, and it will ruin the rest of their lives.

I'm a typical bleeding heart liberal. I get sad when sympathetic criminals on Law and Order get put away, and those are just fictional characters.

That being said, I have no sympathy for these guys. They put a bomb in a crowded area and people died. They weren't playing with a gun and it went off, they weren't selling drugs to feed their family, they did this for no reason other than to harm innocent people. They get no sympathy from me.

However:

Give him a fair trial. Show the rest of the world that no matter how evil you are, you are not greater than the system.

I'd be certain there are enough photgraphs, videos, and witnesses to every event that, even without a confession, a fair trial should be simple and therefore should not require any shortcuts or rule bending.

/how do you tell a guy who can't speak that he has the right to remain silent? It almost sounds like a mean joke.